You are here: PureEnergySystems.com
> News > October
24, 2014; 5:15 GMT
A Late Night Speculative Raving From Hank Mills
In this document I try to formulate my thoughts about a possible way to produce electricity directly from an E-Cat by harnessing magnetic energy from fast moving charged particles.
(WARNING: These are the thoughts of a non-scientist trying to make sense of a complicated topic. All of my thinking could be incorrect.)
Circuit diagram of the Resonant Nuclear Battery with source of alpha particles.
By Hank Mills
Pure Energy Systems News
Quite often I spend my nights reading for hours about a wide variety of topics. Recently, I began looking into aneutronic nuclear fusion reactions and methods of converting the energy of charged particles into electricity. As I read, several ideas started to combine together in my mind, so I wrote this document to try to put them into a coherent format.
First, before reading the remainder of this article, please visit the following page and study the resonant nuclear battery.
Let's start off with four, first principles.
A moving charged particle produces a magnetic field which stores a certain quantity of energy depending upon the charge of the particle, the mass of the particle, and the speed of the particle.
A particle accelerator uses a certain quantity of energy to accelerate a charged particle. This quantity of energy varies depending upon the mass of the charged particle and the speed to which it is accelerated.
A nuclear reaction typically requires a certain quantity of input power. For example, a proton must impart a certain quantity of kinetic energy to initiate a nuclear reaction with Lithium 7 which eventually emits alpha particles.
These alpha particles, like the charged particles accelerated in a man made particle accelerator, produce a magnetic field in proportion to their charge, mass, and speed.
If these above statements are accurate:
Did a certain amount of work have to be performed to produce the magnetic field of the charged particle?
|Alpha particles are actually identical to the nucleus of a helium atom: two protons and two neutrons. The protons have a positive charge and the neutrons have no charge, but together they have a net positive charge. During the Lugano test no alpha particles were detected outside of the reactor or in the ash that was removed after 32 days of operation. If alpha particles are produced in the E-Cat, they only appear when the reactor is turned on. It is important to note that alpha particles can be blocked with a sheet of paper, so the thin alumina walls of the core would have blocked all of them during the test. Additionally, any beta particles, single electrons, would also have been blocked. Both of these types of radiation are in the forum of particles, unlike gamma radiation that is simply an electromagnetic wave.
To produce a magnetic field in the macro scale world, a certain amount of work has to be performed. For example, one unit of kinetic energy may be needed to move a magnet across a copper coil to force electrons to move through the wire. These moving charged particles then produce a magnetic field. In this situation, part of the kinetic energy used to move the magnet was transferred and transformed into electricity in the wire. The person moving the magnet felt this as resistance to the motion of the magnet.
However, in nuclear reactions that emit charged particles, modern physics seems to assume that the kinetic energy of the emitted charged particle equals exactly the quantity of the binding energy it obtained from the original atom. No portion of the binding energy was transferred and transformed into the magnetic field energy of the charged particle. Only kinetic energy was transferred to the charged particle and none of it was transformed into the magnetic field.
(I've spent several hours tonight searching for any reference as to the kinetic energy consumed to produce the magnetic field of a charged particle, but I have not been able to find a single reference. There are countless references to a moving charged particle having a magnetic field; however, there is no explanation of what source of energy forms it. From what I can tell although maybe I am wrong it seems to form for free.)
In other words:
A nuclear reaction of an element with a certain quantity of binding energy takes place.
A charged particle is released with a certain percentage of the original quantity of binding energy.
All of the kinetic energy possessed by the fast moving charged particle came from the portion of binding energy given to it.
If the nuclear reaction was reversed and all the kinetic energy converted back into binding energy, none would be lost.
According to mainstream physics, therefore, the magnetic energy in the magnetic field of the moving charged particle is unaccounted for. Even decay heating of Strontium 90 is claimed to be totally accounted for by the kinetic energy of the charged particles being converted into heat.
So the magnetic field energy of the charged particle seems to be FREE.
This leads to the question, what happens when a charged particle slows down and decays back into an atom after acquiring electrons?
The FREE energy of the magnetic field seems to be lost. Perhaps it returns to the source (ZPE Field) from which it came?
What if the energy stored in the magnetic field could be collected before it dissipates?
One possible method of doing so is converting the power of the collapse of the magnetic field of the charged particle into electricity.
One technology that claims to do this is the resonant nuclear battery of Paul Brown.
The battery was asserted to function by allowing alpha or beta particles to impact a conductive material that is part of an LCR resonant tank circuit oscillating at its self-resonant frequency. Normally, in such a nuclear battery only a small percentage of the kinetic energy of the charged particle would be converted into electricity. However, in this battery the EMF of the collapsing magnetic field of the charged particle is converted into electricity instead of being wasted. The extra power added to the circuit can be removed via a high Q transformer impedance matched to the circuit.
According to Paul Brown, the power of the EMF generated by the collapse of the magnetic field of the charged particle is far greater than the kinetic energy of the same particle. The inventor stated that the Resonant Nuclear Battery produced 7,500 watts of electricity per gram of Strontium 90 used as a source of charged particles. This is compared to the .063 watts of electricity per gram of electricity produced by a state of the art thermal nuclear battery. The difference seems to be due to the fact the thermal nuclear battery only converts the heat (produced by the kinetic energy of the alpha particles) of the strontium being converted into electricity. The resonant nuclear battery also converts the magnetic energy of the charged particles into electricity. The maximum heat produced in strontium 90 due to decay is approximately one watt per gram. A resonant nuclear battery produced 75 watts from far less than a gram of material.
So what does this have to do with the E-Cat?
Since the depletion of lithium has been discovered as a source of power in the E-Cat, the nuclear reaction that may be taking place could be producing large amounts of alpha particles. These alpha particles are most likely decaying and producing a significant amount of heat in the E-Cat. This means an E-Cat could be used as a source of alpha particles in a resonant nuclear battery.
The benefits of an E-Cat, in particular the lithium in an E-Cat, being a source of charged alpha particles are numerous. First, the number of alpha particles generated would most likely be huge since the E-Cat is producing kilowatts of heat from the kinetic energy of the particles being converted into heat. This could result in a large amount of electricity being produced. Secondly, unlike traditional radioactive sources of alpha particles, as soon as the E-Cat was cut off the alpha particles would stop being emitted. There would be no issue with radioactive waste. Third, the cost of the lithium in an E-Cat would be far less than any alpha or beta emitter such as Strontium 90.
The drawback of an E-Cat being the charged particle emitter in a resonant nuclear battery is that the conductor the particles impact would be at a high temperature it may not perform well or survive long.
Potentially, however, the electrical energy produced by such a system could be far greater than the thermal output.
All of this depends, of course, on the measurements on the resonant nuclear battery being correct. It is possible the battery really did not generate seventy five times the output, in electricity from far less of a gram of material, than one gram of strontium 90 produces in the form of heat due to the transformation of the kinetic energy of charged particles.
However, logic seems to dictate that if the magnetic energy of the charged particle in motion does exist and collapses, the EMF should be capable of being harnessed. If the magnetic energy in the magnetic field of the charged particle is totally free and in addition to the kinetic energy, then the description of how the resonant nuclear battery functions seems plausible.
So what do all of you think about this late night raving of mine? What do you think happens to the magnetic field energy of the charged particle? Do you think this could be a method of producing even more power from an E-Cat?
If this battery technology really did function as claimed and harnessed magnetic energy from charged particles, it could be a method of producing vast amounts of electricity from an E-Cat: no steam turbine needed.
# # #
What You Can Do
- See Suggestions for How to Get Involved with the Roll-out of Exotic Free Energy
- Pass this on to your friends and favorite news sources.
- Donate to PES Network
to help us keep this news and directory and networking service going.
- Subscribe to our newsletter
to stay abreast of the latest, greatest developments in the free energy
- Let professionals in the renewable energy sector know about the promise of
PESN Coverage of LENR
For a more exhaustive listing, see News:Rossi_Cold_Fusion
Digest -- May 16, 2015 - Domestic heater E-Cat photo, long
self-sustain periods, size getting smaller (PESN)
Digest -- March 7, 2015 - photos of 1 MW E-Cat with 30,000 components;
rudimentary direct-to-elec. achieved (PESN)
LENR-to-Market Digest -- January 30, 2015 - New report by Alexander Parkhomov showing excess heat in E-Cat
LENR-to-Market Digest -- January 22, 2015 - McKubre reports on a variation of Rossi's 3rd party test in Lugano
A Late Night Speculative Raving From Hank Mills - (PESN; October
Andrea Rossi's E-Cat Devours Lockheed's Hypothetical Compact Fusion Reactor - (PESN; October
The Inconel Mouse of Andrea Rossi's E-Cat - (PESN; October
Hell Freezes Over: Brian Ahern's Doubts on E-Cat Test Resolved - (PESN; October
Leaked Second Paper With High Magnification of Rossi's Nickel Particles Brings Replication Closer - (PESN; October
Sterling Allan on Coast to Coast AM about E-Cat breakthrough - (PESN; October
Revealed The Four Horsemen of Andrea Rossi's E-CatLithium Iron Nickel
Hydrogen - (PESN; October 10, 2014)
Fuel Analysis and Validation Paper Posted October 8, 2014 - (PESWiki;
October 9, 2014)
Digest -- August 22, 2014 - Safety Certification Obtained for Low and High Temperature E-Cats
LENR-to-Market Digest -- April 9, 2014 - Rumblings about pending E-Cat test results
LENR-to-Market Weekly -- March 6, 2014 - Lattice Energy transmutation (PESN)
LENR-to-Market Digest -- February 20, 2014 - Rossi Hopes to Retrofit Coal Power Plants With
LENR-to-Market Digest -- February 5, 2014 - Nanors availability announced at Cold Fusion 101 at
LENR-to-Market Weekly -- January 30, 2014 - Industrial Heat acquires E-Cat
LENR to Market Digest, January 22, 2014
- Blacklight Power claims MW capability (PESN)
LENR-to-Market Digest -- January 6, 2014 - Cherokee identified as
Rossi's partner (PESN)